Teachers’ Expectations and Pupil Performance

Abstract

In light of the failure of most attempts to replicate the original demonstration of potent teacher expectancy effects by Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968), the following study was performed. Within each of ten first grade classes for educationally deprived students, one half of the pupils were pretested with the Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT) and were then randomly assigned to an experimental or control group. Three weeks after the pretesting, teachers received reports stating that pupils in the experimental group had hidden academic potential and might show academic gains during the school year. Pupils were retested with the CAT six months later. Although the experimental group tended to make greater gain scores (as measured by IQ and raw scores) on the CAT (p < .10), no significant differences were found between the two groups on the following measures: reading grade, arithmetic grade, social skills, and reading level. The results of the study were interpreted as not supporting the Rosenthal and Jacobson findings. It was recommended that further exploration of teacher expectancies include, (a) relating expectancies to the overt interaction between students and teacher and (b) investigating teacher expectancies that result from more credible naturalistic inputs.

Teacher Expectation: Sociopsychological Dynamics

“…It was mentioned earlier that these expectancies appear to be generated naturally rather than induced artifically or manipulated (Mendels & Flanders, 1973;Wilkins & Glock, 1973). Furthermore, the potency of specific factors may depend on the degree to which they interact with other factors (Adams & Cohen, 1974;Kehle, 1974).…”

“…Gay (1975) states that the "etiological factors involved in the formulation of expectations are more varied and complex" (p. 168). Mendels and Flanders (1973) note that naturalistic factors are more potent determinants of expectations than contrived sources. They include under naturalistic sources such determinants as (1) communications about students received from other teachers, administrators, and parents, (2) cumulative records, (3) previously established behavioral records, (4) standardized test informa-tion, (5) physical characteristics including sex, attractiveness, motivation, and socioeconomic status.…”

“…Although methodological concerns and the generalizability of the seminal study on teacher expectations have been the subject of wide debate (e.g., Elashoff, Dixon, & Snow, 1971;Mendels & Flanders, 1973;Snow, 1969;Thorndike, 1968;Wilkins & Glock, 1973), the study stands as a significant pioneering effort to uncover some of pupil-teacher interactive dynamics.…”

Teachers’ Expectations

“…Despite this attention, the exact nature of the effects of teachers' expectations is still unknown. For example, several attempts to replicate the Rosenthal and Jacobson studies failed to support the results (6, 8, 14,16). However, other studies using different research paradigms have fairly consistently shown expectancy effects (2,4,13,17) .…”

Some problems in dealing with gain scores

“…In passing, I should mention that there is considerable controversy about the existence of the Hawthorne and Pygmalion Effects, particularly at the elementary school level. See, for example, Fleming and Anttonen (1971), Mendels and Flanders (1973), Webb, et al (1966), and Cook and King (1968).…”